That reminded me of an old framers trick. How to make a Jewellery Box from moulding for gifts.
I made this one back in 1994 for myself from some off cuts and lined out with simple black felt and brass pins for feet and mirror on the lid.
3 Likes
Sorry, I was directing my post at Count.d.
Jason.
Thanks JOF, no I didn’t buy these separately. The oil paintings came framed with them, behind glass, which I thought was odd. I’ve had them a long time and wanted to frame them with the glass, but couldn’t come up with a different solution.
No problem.
How do you know ? 
1 Like
Amazing image. 
Thanks 
It would be such a long answer, so I’ve shortened my view.
The glass weight wouldn’t bother me.
Any form of acrylic can’t be wiped without scratching.
The uv protection is a pretty loose term they all like to state, but the fact is they can be so different. 90 isn’t that great and when it’s the lower quality uv protection (which is most), it can mean that 90% is only the light that hits the glass perpendicular. All the other angles slip the net and uv fades your picture.
Glass pictures aren’t going to affect your hifi (within reason).
If it was me I’d do it properly with anti-reflective glass that protects 99% uv from all angles that you can wipe forever.
1 Like
Two of the same. Bought it from a student of The Norwegian National Academy of Craft and Arts Industry back in 2010. Lithography.
4 Likes
Thanks for your response!
(sorry i accidentally deleted my post before i noticed anyone had replied!) 
I have read from an earlier post you use anti-glare glass ar99 which seems like a good idea.
If i had my way it would be rugs on the walls, great acoustically but risky due to cats vigorous manicuring the claws.
1 Like
In my experience, any form of plastic glass (picture frames, LP12 lid, hifi, pvr, old phone screens…the list goes on) will get fine scratches no matter how careful you are. My eyes pick up micro-fine scratches and I don’t like them. It depends on how the light hits the scratches and whether the picture is light or dark, how much they show up. Some come already from the manufacturer. I’ve had loads of acrylic picture glasses.
When it come to picture framing, the number one priority for me is white ar glass. This ar is like camera lens/eye glasses coatings. It shows up any finger prints and is a sod to clean. If you do your own framing, you have to wear new plastic non-powdered gloves and even these leave a slight mark on the coating as you’re handling the glass. Cotton gloves just don’t work good enough. After you’ve finished the framing, it needs cleaning with glass cleaner. The acrylic would micro-scratch to pieces. Over the years, all sorts of small substances seem to be deposited on the glass surface. I think it must be fly and spider bombers. They like practising on lamp shades too.
You can’t polish ar surfaces.
Number two priority is the uv part. This needs to be the museum grade if you’re going to bother spending this much. Saying all this, the picture will fade in any appreciable amount of light, so where you hang it makes the biggest difference.
Those racing photos were taken by different photographers who were all sold via a business called Jarrotts. The Ferrari in Monaco was by Edward Eves and Stirling Moss was by Alan R. Smith. The others I have tend to be by Smith too. I bought them 30 years ago at Donington race circuit.
1 Like
This is just one from a series I did a while back - still working as a heavy weight digital illustrator full time for advertising. 1,000’s of client brief and many styles later and I’m still enjoying it.
Although my personal art collection is completely different and contrasts 100%. I love 18th-20th century Scottish Highland Oils, especially Breanski Snr.
15 Likes
That’s incredible, I want to learn this.
Thank you! It’s good fun, so much to learn.
Not quite Alfred de Breanski, but you might like the subject matter. The central panel was reportedly saved in the 1970’s, during a Scottish chapel modernisation. This little leaded window as you see it now, was made-up 15 years ago with reclaimed cathedral glass.
9 Likes
Love the panels - they look superb, the rest of the window looks good too!
Here’s a couple of the breanski from the collection, one senior and one Jnr :). I also like F. E. Jamieson. Great artist and a lot cheaper, built up quite a few of these over the years under various alias!
10 Likes
Very nice. Think I prefer the top one.
1 Like
Latest one reframed with all the usual ar99 and cotton boards.
Eubank vs Benn first fight 1990. With Ali, Eubank is my favourite boxer. I always found him hilarious and a beautifully styled boxer. Used to love his fights, when boxing was at its peak and so this is another photo that means a lot. I wonder how long it is before a generation will say “who?” All this archived work will no doubt end up on a skip or sold for £1 one day.
Here’s an interesting pic of one of the small photos that I took out on the right (my replacement is on the left). It’s only about 3 years old and the awful, typical backing board has created so much acid, that it’s made the photo go yellow. If you look closely, you can make out where the mounting tape was on the reverse of the photo. This blocked the acid from tainting it and remains whiter. I find this a lot and just shows all the cheap framing out there is damaging your artwork within just a few years if not months.
4 Likes